make it 6 please

Hi Guys,

again I am indebted to those of you pledging support. The morale of seeing the pledges is enough.

As an update I have today been in contact with a Barrister who has raised concern regarding the whole case. I am indebted to Rhia for this information (she knows the direction she pointed me in).

The process has begun and I am initially establishing the grounds and necessary protocol. Of course, I need to be very protective with certain information that I broadcast on here as I intend to play this one very closely to the chest in terms of tactics/rulings etc - so please do not be offended if I do not share everything. I WILL update regularly for those who are interested and I hope I can deliver some positive news about an attack on the Rankine case in general and provide hope for many more people on here. If not, then the least I can do is highlight the pitfalls that have befallen me along the way and offer these as advice to anybody in a similar predicament.

Thanks to everyone again.

Blue

make that seven.

Hi Guys,

again I am indebted to those of you pledging support. The morale of seeing the pledges is enough.

 

As an update I have today been in contact with a Barrister who has raised concern regarding the whole case. I am indebted to Rhia for this information (she knows the direction she pointed me in).

The process has begun and I am initially establishing the grounds and necessary protocol. Of course, I need to be very protective with certain information that I broadcast on here as I intend to play this one very closely to the chest in terms of tactics/rulings etc - so please do not be offended if I do not share everything. I WILL update regularly for those who are interested and I hope I can deliver some positive news about an attack on the Rankine case in general and provide hope for many more people on here. If not, then the least I can do is highlight the pitfalls that have befallen me along the way and offer these as advice to anybody in a similar predicament.

 

Thanks to everyone again.

 

Blue

it may well be that your thread was monitored- i would say confidentiality from this point on would be very wise

BT - happy to wait until after the event for update and will not be worried if you decide NOT to appeal. Post only what you want to, take care of yourself and your defence!

Hi Guys,

again I am indebted to those of you pledging support. The morale of seeing the pledges is enough.

 

As an update I have today been in contact with a Barrister who has raised concern regarding the whole case. I am indebted to Rhia for this information (she knows the direction she pointed me in).

The process has begun and I am initially establishing the grounds and necessary protocol. Of course, I need to be very protective with certain information that I broadcast on here as I intend to play this one very closely to the chest in terms of tactics/rulings etc - so please do not be offended if I do not share everything. I WILL update regularly for those who are interested and I hope I can deliver some positive news about an attack on the Rankine case in general and provide hope for many more people on here. If not, then the least I can do is highlight the pitfalls that have befallen me along the way and offer these as advice to anybody in a similar predicament.

 

Thanks to everyone again.

 

Blue

This is excellent news that Rhia has been able to direct you forward. Good luck and we look forward to updates as when you are able.

BT, can you make sure you at least say hi and let us know things are ongoing? I know there have been a couple of threads where the original poster appeared to disappear with no news as to their case and it leaves us dangling:)

Good luck.

BT.

We wish you well.

Please drop by from time to time just to say hello'

good luck

the very best regards lilly

BT, Hope it's going well. Happy to pledge £20 towards your case.

Thanks to you for that wonderful pledge.

Unfortunately - and as an update - I have been put off the appeal process, as it would have taken too much to finance the risk as I needed to appeal and lose then appeal again until I reached the necessary court level within the system - with ultimately little chance of winning.

I'm afraid my tale is one of woe and really I was badly let down by the present judicial system, and my own personal (paid-for) advisers. I am taking them to task at present against their undoubted negligence in my case. I await their response with interest. I am extremely close to financial oblivion unless they can rescue something from the fire. I now have a massive ccj against me and no earthly way to overcome it. With the right advice I would be sitting here with no default and just the original debt - which I never ever disputed owing and the ability to raise finance to repay it properly - now I have double the debt, a ccj and no way on earth to raise any finance to clear it. AIC told me right at the beginning that Amex would pursue me to bankruptcy as in doing so they could then benefit from writing the debt off against their corporation tax - I have to say that their sentiments are ringing true at present.

As a former believer in justice and the way our country operated _ i can now see at first hand how manipulative, unfair and one-sided it all is.

Try not to let this tale put you off though - I would implore anybody in a similar situation to enrol as early as possible, some qualified legal advice - the problem is - where from? How do you know what you will get. It's a turkey shoot and until something such as this Group can come up with qualified and affordable representation for the person in the street then I dont know what to suggest. Generally if one could afford legal help one wouldnt be in the situation in the first place. Legal Aid is not meant for the regular joe-public in my opinion and qualification is quite limited - the charities are also limited in their knowledge and what they can offer. Clear leigislation is required - there is too much of a grey area and too little expertise out there.

I will post again when I have further hews and hopefully feeling a bit more positive.

I'm really sorry you're in this predicament BT. You tossed a dice that you thought should be loaded in your favour & it split apart on the DJ/barrister roulette wheel.

Unfortunately you're not on your own & many have found to their cost that although English law is based on sound principles, the application of it is not always a reflection of justice & I endorse the sentiment you have expressed above.

I do hope you will eventually satisfactorily reconcile the devastation & move forward with the components of your life that are truly important - family, friends & having faith in yourself.

FG

BT, this may sound absurd but, check your household contents insurance for "Legal Coverage" and see what it actually covers (especially if you purchase Extended Legal Cover). Many were quite broad in their description (written in the 70's - I was there!) and could, potentially, extend to your current litigation. Whether it could be invoked to cover the previous litigation is, I think, debatable/unlikely but there may be something there.

Should you not understand the wording or anything else, I'll gladly interpret it into English for you - I used to write the things (for the US market, where they had to be tight).

Chin chin

jb

BT, this may sound absurd but, check your household contents insurance for "Legal Coverage" and see what it actually covers (especially if you purchase Extended Legal Cover). Many were quite broad in their description (written in the 70's - I was there!) and could, potentially, extend to your current litigation. Whether it could be invoked to cover the previous litigation is, I think, debatable/unlikely but there may be something there.

Should you not understand the wording or anything else, I'll gladly interpret it into English for you - I used to write the things (for the US market, where they had to be tight).

 

Chin chin

 

jb

most of these policies have "conditions" one of which being that they may take a "view" on the likely outcome and if they do not feel the case is worth pursuing they will refuse to act

most of these policies have "conditions" one of which being that they may take a "view" on the likely outcome and if they do not feel the case is worth pursuing they will refuse to act

They also have to be in at the ground level and will likely refuse a claim that has already begun.

Quote:

Originally Posted by diddydicky

most of these policies have "conditions" one of which being that they may take a "view" on the likely outcome and if they do not feel the case is worth pursuing they will refuse to act

 

They also have to be in at the ground level and will likely refuse a claim that has already begun.

Hi guys,

I appreciate both points, which is why I put the caveat in my original post: "Whether it could be invoked to cover the previous litigation is, I think, debatable/unlikely but there may be something there".

My comment was directed at BT's possible negligence claim against the professional advisers who helped lose his previous action - that is a new claim area.

jb